[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #29051: Add a summary table at the end of system test execs

potiuk commented on PR #29051: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/29051#issuecomment-1397779289 > > (and we should wait for it). > > You mean we should not merge this until AIP-52 gives us a way to mark teardown tasks ? Nope. Wait with separating the tables. I think

[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #29051: Add a summary table at the end of system test execs

potiuk commented on PR #29051: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/29051#issuecomment-1397754758 > Is the watcher supposed to be the "separator" ? Because in that case, disable_job_queue is part of the teardown and apparently executed before the watcher (I sort by end_date, maybe

[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #29051: Add a summary table at the end of system test execs

potiuk commented on PR #29051: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/29051#issuecomment-1397736179 (BTW. Later when we will have explicit setup/teardown support in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-52+Automatic+setup+and+teardown+tasks - we will also be able to

[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #29051: Add a summary table at the end of system test execs

potiuk commented on PR #29051: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/29051#issuecomment-1397735057 Can we maybe also split the watcher and what happens after to a separate table (indicating this is a teardown?) we have a enough of a convention to know it I think and that would be